Ruud van Ingen, UFI President thinks that Europe still denies the power and influence of the exhibition industry. This means that there is no policy, wich gives the European countries some room to manoeuvre.
Is well known that Germany supports its exhibitions industry compared to The Netherlands, for example.
There are proofs that countries wich give exhibitions and events an important place in their economic development are very successful.
Europe was seen as a strong economic force. In the field of exhibitions it has a solid position as entrepreneur, as guide and advisor for developments in and relations with and between Asia and America, the Middle East and India. The cracks in the Union make us look as a power block that is getting lost. If no action is taken, the trust will decline and organizers will skip Europe to directly orient themselves to other locations. Therefore, the European market of fairs and exhibitions must look out for the competitors, China being a good example.
Governments can help the companies in participating to such events. For example, in Romania the Department for Foreign Commerce allocated in 2005 15 millions RON for the participation of Romanian companies to fairs and exhibitions; still, only 13.6 millions RON were used. That means either the companies didn’t know about it or the managers don’t consider important the attendance of their
companies to this kind of events. The closed export contracts of the attendees were of 240 millions Euros, the degree of usage of the funds designated to promote exports grew from 53% in 2004 to 90% in 2005.
Another example of country that invests in helping the companies that want to attend a fair or exhibition is France. Is well known the fact that fairs/exhibitions are a very costly way to prospect a certain market. For example in France COFACE helps the companies to insure the risk of prospecting activity witch can be long and cost a lot of money.
In conclusion, trade fairs occupy an important place in the marketing budget, especially for small and medium enterprises. The role trade fairs occupy in the marketing mix is open to debate, and many exhibitors are unable to say whether the show had worked at all, as many of them don’t have any goals at the begining of the show. So, in order to be able to analyze the revenue that such an event brought to your company, you must set some goals and do your best to reach them.
References
1. Zamfir, Moise – Marketing prin intermediul targurilor si expozitiilor, Editura All Educational SA, Bucuresti, 1997
2. Zamfir, Moise – Targurile, expozitiile si conventiile, instrumente de marketing, Editura ALL Back, Bucuresti, 2002
3. Kuhlin, Bernd.; Thielmann, Heinz -The Practical Real Time Enterprise: Facts and Perspectives, Publication: Berlin, London Springer Science & Business Media, 2005.
4. The State of the Trade Show.-Association Management; Jun 2003, Vol. 55 Issue 6, p73, 1/3, ISSN:0004-5578
5. http://www.eventseye.com
6. http://www.trade-show-advisor.com 7. http://www.reedexpo.com
8. http://www.ufinet.org/pages/publicationspress/articles.asp
B BE EN NC CH HM MA AR RK KI IN NG G AN A ND D B BE ES ST T PR P RA AC CT TI IC CE ES S I IN N M MU UN NI IC CI IP PA AL L SE S ER RV VI IC CE ES S: : A A CO C OM MP PA AR RA AT TI IV VE E S SU UR RV VE EY Y O ON N T TH HE E P PE ER RF FO OR RM MA AN NC CE E I IN ND DI IC CA AT TO OR R S SY YS ST TE EM MS S
U US SE ED D B BY Y R RO OM MA AN NI IA AN N W WA AT TE ER R S SU UP PP PL LY Y O OP PE ER RA AT TO OR RS S
Cioc Mihai Marian
Academia de Studii Economice din Bucure ti, PiaŃa Romană nr. 6 sector 1 Bucure ti, tel. 004 021 319 19 69, e-mail: mihaicioc@gmail.com
In the water supply sector, as in many sectors of the economy, the fundamental objective of benchmarking is to search and identify best practices. Collection of data is not benchmarking, but is a necessary step to conduct benchmarking. In many countries, such as Romania or Bulgaria, the lack of data prevents benchmarking as the data to do so is either unavailable or of insufficient quality to ensure any meaningful comparison of data. Although benchmarking is a highly used technique in European Union, in Romania there is a lack of experience in this field. In order to establish how benchmarking is used to evaluate managerial performance and quality of the service by romanian’s water supply operators, there has been conducted a SWOT analysis. The main objective of the analyssis was to support access to comparative information that will help to promote best practice among water supply providers from Romania and eventually will provide consumers with access to high quality, and affordable water supply service.
Water supply system; benchmarks; management contracts; european standards; best practices
In Romania, the water supply public service is going to have a more significant role in the next few years.
Taking into consideration economic importance of water as a strategic resource, the efficiency and quality of the service represent competitive factors on the water supply market, with an essential role in obtaining investments in all setors, as well as in less promoted regions. Providing water supply public service in a performant and non-discriminating manner also represents an important condition for the functioning of a single market and for a faster integration in the European Union.
Also, the Romanian adheration at the European Union requires the compliance with precised criteria regarding the performant and quality public services of general interest and, mostly, the development of the network industries and their connexions, in order to facilitate the European integration, the increase of the citizens wellbeing and the compliance in a short period of time with the European standards.
According to the European Union standards, Romania has to keep in mind the fact that, in the water supply service development and organisation process, the main principle regards the setting-up of those conditions able to offer to the consumers European services with affordable prices. The performant and quality water supply service are also essential for the increase of the citizens wellbeing and for their fundamental rights.
The population has to be aware of the fact that the European Union considers very important the individual and non-discriminating access for everyone at the public services of general interest.
In this context, a very significant role is played by the organisations responsable to monitorise the water supply sector and to conduct surveys on the management performance of the service. The first preocupations in this area were started by the World Bank, in 1996, who developed an initiative that would enable water professionals with an interest in utility performance to compare data by working on reducing the key barriers to benchmarking through three principal ways of action:
a. the agreement on a standard set of indicators;
b. the use of a standard set of definitions;
c. the sharing of results.
In the water supply sector, as in many sectors of the economy, the fundamental objective of benchmarking is to search and identify best practices. Collection of data is not benchmarking, but is a necessary step to conduct benchmarking. In many countries, such as Romania or Bulgaria, the lack of data prevents benchmarking as the data to do so is either unavailable or of insufficient quality to ensure any meaningful comparison of data. Although benchmarking is a highly used technique in European Union, in Romania there is a lack of experience in this field.
Inter-utility performance comparison is needed in the water sector, because the sector offers limited scope for direct competition. Water companies operating in competitive markets are under constant pressure to out perform each other. Water utilities are often sheltered from this pressure, and it frequently shows: some utilities are on a sustained improvement track, but many others keep falling further behind best practice.
This matters, because a well-run water utility is essential to people's lives. Only the most efficient, financially viable utilities are able to respond to urban growth, connect the poor, and improve wastewater disposal practices.
Generally, benchmarking systems for water supply public service uses three categories of criterias:
technical, financial and continuity.
a. Technical criterias includes the operational ones (regarding cost reduction and implementing the environment policies) and consumer satisfaction criterias (regarding the quality of the service).
b. Financial criterias are used in order to analyse the economic viability of water supply operators.
In order to evaluate the performances of the service, financial criterias includes three subcategories: profitability, solvability and liquidity. This indicators offers a general view on the financial situation of the operators and the statistical database needed to generate forecasts for the market evolution. Also, there is a strong need to monitorise the evolutions of this indicators, in order to identify their tendencies.
c. Continuity criterias includes rellevant informations regarding the variation of assets and the investment policy. The investment effort must be considered as a complex process that must be subordinated to objectifs like the achieving of european standards for life quality, environment protection and sustainable development.
In order to establish how benchmarking is used to evaluate managerial performance and quality of the service by romanian’s water supply operators, we conducted a SWOT analysis. The main objective of the analyse was to support access to comparative information that will help to promote best practice among water supply providers from Romania and eventually will provide consumers with access to high quality, and affordable water supply service. We consider the results of this study can be used by various stakeholders:
a. utility managers and employees can identify areas for improvement, adopt realistic targets and convince authorities of the need for change;
b. local authorities can monitor and adjust sector policies and programs;
c. National Regulatory Authority for Municipal Services can ensure that customers get value, and providers have incentives to perform;
d. customer groups and other organisations that represents their interests;
e. financial institutions can identify viable markets and opportunities for creating value.
The survey was concentrated in identifying the strenghts and weaknesses that describe how is the benchmarking technique applied by some of the most representative water supply services providers from Romania (Table no. 1).
Table no. 1 Strenghts and Weaknesses: How is benchmarking applied by Romania’s water supply operators
indicators.
7. Deficiencies regarding the preparation and the structure of management contracts.
As we can see from the above analysis, one of the principal problem in measuring performances is the lack of continuity and financial indicators, especially in the field of the quality of the service. We consider that IBNET (International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities) can provide the right indicators for measuring the quality of the water supply service (Table no. 1).
Table no. 1 IBNET Water Supply Benchmarking System - Quality of Service Indicators
No Indicator Definition Unit
1 Continuity of Service Average hours of service per day for water supply. Hrs/day
2 Customers with percentage of the total number of W&WW connections % 6 Wastewater – at least
primary treatment Proportion of collected sewage that receives at least primary treatment, i.e. involving settlement with the intention of removing solids, but not biological treatment. Both lagoon and mechanical treatment can be included, where appropriate.
%
7 Wastewater primary
treatment only Proportion of collected sewage that receives primary treatment only, i.e. involving settlement with the intention of removing solids, but not biological treatment. Both lagoon and mechanical treatment can be included, where appropriate.
%
8 Wastewater secondary
treatment or better Proportion of collected sewage that receives at least secondary treatment, i.e. removing oxygen demand as well as solids, normally biological. Both lagoon and mechanical treatment can be included, where appropriate.
%
Historically there has been limited attention paid to measures that capture the quality of service provided to customers. This, in fact, should be a particular focus of performance measurement. The measures presented above are a limited first step in the process of capturing information on quality of service. Complaints, while relatively easy to track, give only a glimpse of actual company performance - consumers may have become accustomed to poor service and not complain. In other instances it may be difficult for customers to report complaints. Capturing at least some customer derived data, however, is considered to be an important starting point.
Collection of wastewater does not mean that the waste is fully treated before discharge back to the environment. The wastewater treatment indicators will provide an understanding of the amount of effluent that is treated before being discharged. A more comprehensive set of quality of service indicators could be developed but the likelihood of the data being collected by utility managers is limited in the short term.
Expansion of the set is therefore a medium to long term objective. Water supply stakeholders routinely search for information about the performance of their service, and that of comparator organisations, both regionally and nationally. Unfortunately such information is not routinely available – not because of a lack
of interest, but more because of a lack of a common framework within which to communicate and share the information effectively.
Bibliography:
1. http://www.ib-net.org – The International Benchmarking Network for Water and Sanitation Utilities Official WebPage
2. Radu I., Vlădeanu D. – „Analiza diagnostic i strategia de dezvoltare a serviciilor publice de gospodărie comunală”, Ed. Tribuna Economică, Bucure ti, România, 2004.
3. Morley E., Scott P., Harry P.H. - “Comparative Performance Measurement”, Ed. Urban Institute Press, Washington, S.U.A, 2002.
4. Gaster L., Squires A. - “Providing Quality in the Public Sector: A Practical Approach to Improving Public Services”, Ed. Open University Press, New York, S.U.A., 2003.
5. Andrei D. – „FinanŃarea infrastructurii serviciilor publice de gospodărie comunală”, Ed.
Ministerului AdministraŃiei i Internelor, Bucure ti, România, 2004.
6. Shah A. - “Public Services Delivery (Public Sector, Governance, and Accountability) (Public Sector, Governance, and Accountability Series)”, Ed. World Bank Pubblications, Washington, S.U.A. 2005.
7. Alegre H., Hirner W., Baptita J.M. – „Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services”, International Water Association, London, 2000.
8. AWWA – „Benchmarking Performance Indicators Report for Water & Wastewater Utilities”, American Water Works Association, Los Angeles, 2002.
9. Brueck T. – „Developing and Implementing a Performance Management System for a Water/
Wastewater Utility”, Water Intelligence Online, 2005
PE P ER RF FO OR RM MA AN NC CE E M MA AN NA AG GE EM ME EN NT T A AN ND D E E- - L LE EA AR RN NI IN NG G I IN N VI V IR RT TU UA AL L OR O RG GA AN NI IZ ZA AT TI IO ON NS S
Ciungu Petre
Free International University of Moldova, 0253211702, e-mail:petrica1951@k.ro Popeanga Vasile
„Constantin Brâncu i” University, Tg-Jiu, Romania, 0253218222, e-mail: vasile_popeanga@yahoo.com Abstract: At the present time we are facing a paradigmatic change in developing learning assisted systems: in the last years their development was technology centered, but nowadays their development centers on the application of specific human behavior concepts in using the new communications, learning, and business technologies. In the business context, knowledge and learning management are perceived as the new critical managerial battlefields aiming to sustainable performance. Technology enhanced learning, approaches and new generation knowledge management systems reveal a new context for the promotion of business strategy. The concepts of competencies and competency management are the new blueprints for merging leading edge technology approaches to business objectives. The vision for knowledge and learning ecosystem within every knowledge intensive organization is crafted around the management of competencies that brings together business processes, training needs, learning and market demands.
Keywords: E-learning, performance management, virtual organizations.
1. INTRODUCTION
The Internet has dramatically changed the way people get informed, interact and communicate in the 21st century. Distribution of information and knowledge is nowadays carried out more and more via the Internet.
The conditions under which knowledge based work is done are clearly different from those of the traditional industrial and/or service work and therefore the established criteria of work design cannot be simply copied. New approaches, concepts and methods are necessary to create optimum conditions for productive, healthy and attractive knowledge work at the organizational, team and individual level.
In the actual knowledge-based society, the activities in domains of all kind (productive, of design, economic, research, and of other nature) are interconnected with training activity. Therefore, the necessity of continuous education at working places arose. That is why one has to find efficient training methods, to solve problems, as the persons have to be able; to learn without leaving work places; to learn about subjects related to their instant work; to learn cooperatively with other persons, interested in the same domains, but located in other places; to share information resources with their co-learners.
At the present time we are facing a paradigmatic change in developing learning assisted systems:
in the last years their development was technology centered, but nowadays their development centers on the application of specific human behavior concepts in using the new learning, communications and business technologies.
2. KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VERSUS ORGANIZATIONAL E-LEARNING